Turning off UAC?

I'm sure there may have been a few threads about UAC in Vista. I personally have gotten rid of this annoyance by enabling the master admin account and using that. I have heard that there are some disadvantages in using the master admin account, but does anybody know what these disadvantages/security problems this may pose? As far as I can see, I can gain access to everything unrestricted which is great as I like to poke around my system now and again and I don't need Windows to tell me I may damage my system everytime I do this. What are your views?

If unwanted software gets into your system and can run with your administrator credentials, it can also access anything it wants without restriction - both file system and registry. Restricting security so that day-to-day tasks can be done but any significant changes require administrator intervention or permission reduces the likelihood that unwanted software can make damaging changes. For example, leaving UAC on means Internet Explorer runs in protected mode, which sandboxes the IE session and prevents malware infecting your system. Microsoft have found that Vista is 60% less likely to be affected by IE drive-by infections than XP was.

i agree with "brundle" on the security points with ie8,i have no problem with "uac" after all its just a click to allow oe deny,no big deal ,but its your decision,also as regards to the free "norton uac"again i dont see the point,in fact ANYTHING norton is a no no with me.

2. The main point of Norton UAC is that it provides Vista UAC with a memory so if it keeps asking permission for the same activity you can set it to remember that you don't want to be notified on those specific occasions only.

I was of the same opinion about Norton, i.e. 'ANYTHING norton is a no no'. But I was pleasantly surprised and was glad to be proved wrong by Norton's UAC, I find it an invaluable piece of software for any Vista user.

I can see the reason behind Vista's UAC, but surely when you are running the same program day in day out, you do not need to be prompted all the time about it. With Norton's UAC, you have the security of Vista's UAC, but for familiar and safe programs that you run yourself you can tick the 'don't ask me again' tick box. If an unauthorized program tries to run, you will be prompted about it in the same way has you would if you didn't have Norton's UAC installed and instead were using Vista's UAC.

I've followed this thread because I'm irritated by UAC too. I understand it is a good fairy protecting me from nasties, but when it has asked me whether or not to allow a "website to open web content using this program", it then offers me a tick box saying " do not show me this warning for this program again". Whether I have allowed or not, ticking this box has absolutely no effect whatsoever: what is the point of it?Would it help to use IE8? I once tried the upgrade from IE7 offered by Windows update but it failed to work so I went back to 7. I am very reluctant to invoke Norton for such a trivial task.

'a tick box saying " do not show me this warning for this program again". Whether I have allowed or not, ticking this box has absolutely no effect whatsoever: what is the point of it?'

But Norton's UAC does have the tick box so that you will not be asked again for that particular program. The only time you will be asked again with Norton's UAC is in some instances when the program in question has been updated.

I am not a fan of Norton's products, but the Norton UAC is a god send for anyone who is sick of Microsoft's UAC.

Thank you, FatboySlim71. Sorry for delayed reply: I've been away on hols. Norton UAC now installed, and it solves that problem. I still fail to understand the point of a non-effective tick box, but it doesn't matter any more. Thanks.